Brands, breakthroughs and bias: Here's why you've heard so much about Sony recently

If it feels like we've been writing a lot about Sony recently, you haven't been imagining things: we've been writing about its products and technologies quite a bit. But there's a good reason for that – the company has simply given us a lot to write about.

A period of intense, sustained activity, set against a backdrop of relative inactivity from its competitors has seen Sony receive probably more coverage than any other brand.

Ever since it bought Konica Minolta's camera business, Sony has been trying to find a foothold in a market sector that's historically been dominated by two camera makers. Its first attempts were to crowd-out the shelves with 'me-too' SLRs. Actually, that's not quite fair, the a350 was pretty innovative, in its own way. But despite offering lots of models often at low prices, this didn't yield the desired results.

Sony's attempts at innovation don't start with the RX and a7 cameras, but the relentless pace of its updates are a relatively recent trend.

But Sony's more recent moves, particularly the embrace of full-frame mirrorless and 1" sensor compacts, along with numerous additional features arriving in the realms of video, sensor technology and autofocus, have included some significant steps forward for the industry. And ones that are relevant for a broad range of photographers.

This has left us with a lot of technology and features to write about. Sometimes this comes in the form of a standalone tech article, other times in the reviews themselves, as we try to explain the real-world benefits and shortcomings we've encountered while using them.

Of course we've seen this before: periods of innovation from various manufacturers as the industry grows and changes. The introduction of the first mirrorless camera by Panasonic, for example, or its subsequent improvements in video (we often joke that the launch of a GH series camera means we all have to learn more about film-making). Fujifilm was the first to offer on-sensor phase detection and, while divisive, its X-Trans color filter array and DR Modes have given us plenty to talk about.

Mirrorless cameras, as pioneered by Panasonic and Olympus have been the area with most innovation in recent years. Again, this has meant we've written about them a lot, as the technology has improved.

What's unique, though, is the continued drive, this sustained flood of products and of new technologies that Sony has recently been responsible for. And, more starkly, this has come at a time when the industry's largest two companies have been comparatively quiet. Over the past four years, Sony has released around 60% more new high end (>$1000) models than any of its rivals.

This has come at a time when the industry's largest two companies have been comparatively quiet

This has meant that we write a lot about Sony right now. Not because it's Sony, specifically, but because they're the company doing so much of the running at the moment. And of course, our coverage isn't always positive. Our job is to cover technology and innovations regardless of how well they perform, so in addition to being impressed by the capabilities of DRAM-backed Stacked CMOS sensors, we've also written about banding, striping, and work that still needs to be done on the menu systems.

Sony isn't the only brand innovating, of course. We continue to be impressed by Canon's Dual Pixel AF design, particularly in terms of the benefits it brings for video shooting, and Nikon launched the D850, arguably the best DSLR the world has seen. But neither brand is delivering the constant innovation that currently sets Sony apart right now.

This is to be expected: the dominant players in the industry will be keen not to change an apparently winning formula, while the insurgent newcomer needs to offer something suitably different to entice people away from the tried and tested 'safe' choice.

Canon didn't achieve its market dominance by chance. Cameras such as the EOS 5D and EOS 300D/Digital Rebel offered something none of its rivals did.

Looking back, we've been here before. Canon didn't achieve its recent market dominance solely by chance: a combination of investment in CMOS technology and aggressive pricing of its mass-market DSLRs played a big role. This combination gave it several years in which its cameras had a distinct edge over most rivals.

Similarly, Nikon made great strides forward around the time of the D3 and D300. These two cameras brought hugely improved autofocus as well as a move to CMOS sensors which greatly increased low light performance (and dynamic range, in subsequent iterations).

The long-expected thinning-out of the camera industry hasn't yet happened: there are still plenty of players in the market. The thing that's changed is that they're all competing for a slice of a much smaller pie than they were, just a few years ago. This is likely to mean more brands trying the aggressive, fast-iteration, constant innovation approach that Sony (and, to a lesser degree, Fujifilm) is taking. It's also unlikely that Sony can continue at this rate indefinitely: there's every chance that its strategy is to capitalize on being first mover by staking out as much territory as it can before everyone else responds.

Manufacturers are all competing for a slice of a much smaller pie

As the remaining camera brands fight for recognition and search for tech and features to distinguish themselves, we should have plenty more to write about. Especially if, as all the rumors suggest, Canon, Nikon or both end up introducing high-end mirrorless cameras in the next twelve months. After all, despite being well-entrenched in the DSLR market, they'll both be relative newcomers to serious mirrorless, so may feel the need to be more innovative than we've seen in a while.

Busy times, then. And we will cover these with the same vigor and enthusiasm we try to show for every innovative launch. Regardless of which name is on the front of the product.

I hate Sony for many valid reasons, all stemming from failed products, abandoned products and lack luster support. Experience across a broad spectrum of platforms, (HiFi, laptops, audio formats, gaming, etc). No other company has burned my fingers so many times. No other company comes close. The hate has justification.

I could care less if you want to dabble with Sony; I've had my fill. However, I will protest whenever I hear Sony being trumpeted as the second coming. And I'll protest louder whenever someone says, "Can't _insert brand_ be more like Sony?".

I can't vouch for others' dislike of Sony, but I'd be willing to bet a few share my experience.

These are companies. There is nothing to hate nor would it serve any purpose. What can be "hated" is the ease with which an organization that provides ostensibly ubiased information accepts trips, sponsored content and so on. Of course these things are useful and everyone involved thinks they're a straight arrow but as this article hints, people have noticed things are getting pretty cozy. Not unique to the photo industry of course.

Honestly--so much attention to Sony that it warrants an article on why so much attention to Sony. Um, ok, sure.

BTW, this is not the same conflict as being part of Amazon since consumers can buy whatever they want from Amazon.

I think here's how it started: Sony users started to sing the same song like "others are bad and Sony is perfect". They have claimed Sony is so far ahead in everything and Canikon Olympus Panasonic Pentax suck big time.This aggressive behaviour caused reaction and now there are 3 camps: Sony trolls who keep saying Sony is the best and others suck, Sony haters who are fed up with Sony trolls bad mouthing / pitying / belittling his/her brand, normal users who just go out and take photos.So aggressiveness have come from Sony trolls and Vloggers/Youtubers.

I am not a Sony player. Indeed I have sold out of Pentax F to gonwith Fuji for the quality I need and Panasonic m43 for the compactness on long walks.However what allies Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji with Sony is innovation and embracing mirrorless technology.5 years from now no matter how brilliant the mirror will be history.

I want an advanced compact, that produced high quality photos. All the compacts (Sony, Nikon, Canon, Fuji, Panasonic....) on the market are just garage. They don't want to produce nice compacts, because it might into the sales of their mirrorless or SLRs.

Smartphone have smaller sensors, but they have doing a lot of innovation to get the best result of out it. I really don't want to go down the smartphone route.....

In terms of design they are doing a fantastic job, but photo quality stucks. My old 7MP camera was taking better photos. New sensors suck big time, it looks like they are doing funny things to the colours. Many of the review photos on DP have the remark 'edited in Adobe Camera Raw'.... Out of the box photos all look wrong.

And no, smartphones won't come close anytime soon. Sure, they make make pretty pictures, but it takes a ton of work to get consistent results, where regular cameras can shoot off 10fps of high quality consistency every day of the week with little input.

I agree with DPR and I don't see it as a bad thing that they have been talking a lot about Sony. Sony simply has come up with some darn bloody amazing products lately and the price for the A7III is just crazy good, so who can blame them? Sony has raised the bar for ALL other camera manufacturers indeed. And that's a good thing for us camera consumers :-)

it's simple...SONY invested a lot in R&D for sensors.They sold a lot of them, and, continued investing in sensor R&D and sensor production facilities.Also, SONY "won the lottery" when smartphones took off (iPhone!) and now every non-starving human got one (at least). (And 98% of smartphone has at least one camera sensor made by SONY, perhaps).Now, with all the cash coming from sensors sales, SONY can afford doing R&D in cameras and creating many innovative cameras.Well... the question for us, camera geeks, here: do we find those SONY cameras interesting enough ?Innovative... yes...ergonomic, "stylish", really more useful ?...really weather resistant ?!!whatever...I'm still happy with the 2012 16mpx sensors in my E-M5 and K5IIs.both made by SONY, probably.

This site is mostly about new products - announcements and reviews of interesting products. This article is right - Sony has just plain delivered more new product than other companies. Canon has been pretty quiet - Nikon, if not for the D850 release (yes, it is excellent) has been in a virtual coma. So, yes, the news has been about Sony.

Good article. We all have noticed a few Sony bashers (particular one caused my attention as I happen know him well in a decade) despite never own and experience Sony cameras and lenses, keep jumping into many Sony threads in Sony FE forum and comment threads to undermine a brand and its cameras that otherwise nothing to do with him. They made no contribution but only for trolling purpose.

Sony has the most innovations in last several years, that should be great news as it will compel other manufacturers to do the same. More competition is only good for photography industry and benefit consumers. Don't understand the motivation of a few bashers, what they gain at end of a day?

Yup. instead of canikon feeling butt hurt all they have to do is one-up SONY with a similar spec FF ML camera. They also put a global sensor in it. Sell also for $2K. Done deal. 1st one to do that will start hogging the news. Then SONy will be butt hurt

Another reason for so many Sony articles is that the eyeball / click count of these articles usually exceed other real topics (not counting political and outrage baits). Eyes/clicks are the currency of most web sites.

I don't see a need for an apology because the substance is pretty obvious (innovation and cost). But take a look at the comment count already!

@AstroStan I used to look at the "most popular cameras" chart where DPR was basically tracking clicks by camera models. Essentially there were upticks (to 5-10%) around two events : product announcements, and review publications.

I like both Canon and Nikon bodies. Sony is moving in that direction after trying to make everything smaller. Body feel is of course very subjective so your milage WILLvary, but I think the 5D and 7D bodies are just about perfect or even the 6DII with the flippy touch screen. Their build quality is also amazing.

Yes the perfect camera to carry for work is an 80D/6DII one. The weight, size, buttons, all right-hand controls, balances lenses, just a perfect. The rebel-sized a7's and so on just need to either shrink for a purse or grow a bit for a "work" camera! Entirely subjective I know but SOME of it IS objective, kind of

I have the Sony Nex 6 and 7, and the a6000 and a 6500, and don’t mind reading about Sony cameras, but am unlikely to buy a new SLR. At age 81, portability is my top priority along its IQ. I had hoped to get your review of the Panasonic ZS200, but finally gave up and ordered one, up next Monday. I also like articles on iPhone cameras, but slanted towards technique since I am sticking with my Apple 8+. When I wake up each morning, the first site I visit is DPR, unless some disaster has occurred or is pending. But disaster is now omnipresent thanks to fungus amungus In DC.

This is fun ... Pentax: Last year's camera is now available in blue and red.Olympus: Our new camera is now bigger and more expensive than full frame.Panasonic: We just released our own version of whatever Olympus just released.Fuji: Our medium format camera uses Bayer because if it used X-Trans, it would capture so much light, the consequences would be staggering.

The only reason you think they have it is because you tie in the pro photographers and your emotions over the decades into the mix. 20 years ago i bet you dreamt of Canon or Nikon gear and that brand connection is still there pushing you after years to write things like this :) Or... by in you mean history then yeah they have it... Go get a leica and you will feel "it" even more.

Same here. Being able to AF nearly every lens ever made is as big a game changer as any Sony feature, but gets looked down upon since it isn't up to native performance. But then if you compare it to manually focusing in a quick environment...

for now. I'm no pundit but should dedicated cameras continue to take a beating from cellphones, then I don't see a company like Sony sticking it out without say to least dropping one or more of their models and contracting their offerings. They've done it before with oddly enough cellphones, yet again the similar was said way back when they made the PS1 so who knows. The higher-end market for any camera company I suppose can't sustain many of them especially more than one maker. There's more money to be had at the consumer level, and those little pocket cameras that sony makes are still doing well,but again for now

It seems Sony's philosophy is to excite people with new technologies, whereas Canon thinks that we have reached at a point where there is nothing that will change your photography radically - there are only incremental updates. Also Canon wants to provide features that are just "good enough", they don't want to provide anything more than that. Like- "if 61 AF points is enough, why provide hundreds of AF points?" And from my understanding, Sony checks photography websites like Dpreview and knows very well what excites enthusiast photographers, and they act accordingly. Their most talked about products are targeted at enthusiasts. Canon sells a lot of low and mid-low end ILCs like 800D, 200D, M50 etc which are not meant for enthusiasts who visit Dpreview.

If DPR did not post about Sony and focused on the "innovations" and releases of Canon/Nikon, we would be served multiple articles about the D850 (fantastic camera BTW), multiple articles on AI-based camera phones, hundreds of photos of cats...followed by multiple Chris/Jordan cat videos

Seriously though - At this moment of time, there just isn't much (innovative or not) being released by other brands. You know it's a slow period when other front page material consists of firmware upgrades, inexpensive knock-off lens, and release news of an instant film camera.

Just look at much smaller photography website... from rumor sites to photo blogs. You can easily spot anywhere from 3-10 advertisements per page. Looking at DPR at this very moment, no doubt the largest photo website with the largest amount of traffic.. there is one small banner of a company that makes rain coats I have never heard of on top.. and a small box on the right with same advert in a different format.

There is no way that these 2 small adverts would be able to even cover one employees paycheck, much less the whole staff, rent etc...

Looking at 1/2 of the articles... with titles like "Lens News" "Camera News" "Mobile" etc... They for the most part are press releases.. ADVERTISEMENTS!

It has nothing to do with advertising revenue from individual advertisers and everything to do with more views. Stoking branding and fanboyism gets more views and comments. I don't for a second believe DPR is compromised from individual advertisers but adverts pay for everything in the end so they're driven to get people reading.

Adverts are all over the pages at DPR.. "hidden" in plain site. Recently DPR's editor wrote a lengthy article explaining that many people had been asking about advertising, sponsorship etc.. so they decided to label "sponsored" content as such.

(Aren't all these press releases "Lens News", Camera News" etc I mentioned above also advertisements? Why are they not labeled as such?)

The article continued to express that in no way does being sponsored by a client have any affect whatsoever on the editorials staffs objectivity...whatsoever, and even found it to be a bit insulting to insinuate this.

Sony spends 100's of thousands on flying out bloggers, reviewers from most large sites, including DPR .. putting them up in nice hotels, feeding them etc etc and NOT expect anything in return whatsoever.. is delusional. What, you think Sony just want's to share their wonderful products... just for the fun of it, because they love to share?

@cbphoto - So if what you're saying is true, everything they say in a review is suspect. But then you read the reviews and see the videos and they are straight up and honest about what they like and don't like and it's easy to evaluate why from what they say. There are no secrets that I can tell. Your cynicism is uninspiring.

Regarding press releases about new products, do any other web sites label them as advertisements? And why should they? I don't think the manufacturers are paying to get them published, they just send them out to news media in the hope that they'll get published. A press release is not an advertisement.

@cbphoto - the proof is in the articles. I think it's very clear that the reviewers are not bashful in pointing out weaknesses in any of the cameras and/or lenses. Plenty of skepticism and healthy criticism around here. So you can rest easy though anxious one.

Nothing recent about it. You write a lot about Sony and it has been years. Not so much about other brands. I can't see how Panasonic or Olympus have not done as much. But apparantly their endeavour is very much into what a system needs: lenses. And here Sony simply just cannot compete, not for its APS-c mirrorless cams which is a big shame (FE lenses just are not taylored towards APs-c in its FL and size and weight) but still also not when it comes to the FF part of their cams. That is surely not to say they are doing a lacklustre job, I think the lens line up is filled with nice and sensible lenses too (F4 zooms are a good way to reduce size and weight over 2.8). Still in my view dpreview is heavily focussed on FF sensored mirrorless cams and far less so when it comes to lenses. That is uncalled for: lenses make or break the system...Less Sony would be good: not for the sake of it but for the very good reason that all those bodies need a good lens setup.

CCD mainly had global shutter, while CMOS mainly has rolling shutter. Can't use flash on an electronic shutter with rolling shutter, or one half of the image will be dark. On the other hand, flashes as cheap as the Godox TT350 ($85) now offer HSS for mechanical shutters, which are compatible with any sensor type.

Sony's Betacam SP survived long past the advent of non-linear editing, simply because it was stable and got the job done, while NLEs had a lot, LOT of kinks to be worked out. The dSLR vs. mirrorless debate reminds me somewhat of those days, particularly in the way each side tends to oversell their own respective advantages.

". . . despite offering lots of models often at low prices, this didn't yield the desired results." I really don't know what Sony was thinking. It's as if they thought that lens selection doesn't matter . . . and how long did they actually wait to see what was going to happen, after they FINALLY introduced their A99? Not long. Instead they dismantled their customer base and probably scared off a lot of would-be adopters, by introducing full-frame mirrorless - the A7. I think that was a HUGE mistake. They should have kept that thing under wraps and kept introducing innovative new SLT bodies and producing more and more lenses. After-all, those lenses work on the A7 and subsequent bodies. They could have made an 800mm f5.6 lens with optical image stabilization. THAT is one of the indicators that Sony is serious about the industry, which people wanted to see before switching to Sony. A camera with a set of lenses is a big investment, which smart people are careful about making.

As a Sony A mount shooter I tend to agree. They never plugged some obvious gaps in the lens lineup as they didn't carry forward quite a few Minolta lenses or create modern equivalents of them. I was attracted to Sony because my first digital camera was a Minolta A1 and I was sold on IBIS (in my film days I was an Oly OM user). So I bought an A100 in preference to a Nikon D90.

Sadly after that Sony brought out a succession of DSLR's that REMOVED useful features from that camera and it was only when the A77 appeared some of them came back. Only to be removed again on the A77 II (for me notably GPS). I am now locked into A mount for the foreseeable future as I can't afford to replace my lenses and using an adapter on the ergonomically inferior A7 series is of no interest to me.

If for any reason I need to replace my kit I don't trust Sony enough to go E mount given their history with A mount.

A mount turned out to be an albatross around Sony's neck. Maybe a good platform for experimenting, but there was never going to be anything Sony could have done to make a dent in Canon & Nikon's market share. They (and KM before them) did make a mistake in not releasing some lenses that could have exploited IBIS (like affordable fast primes). But the best thing they could have done was to go mirrorless and that took time to figure out what to do in the market (NEX was a mess; APS-C still hasn't been done well, but the FF lineup is well designed and successful). DSLR sales are dwindling and Nikon and Canon are looking to get into mirrorless to maintain their shares of ILC sales. Sony investing even more money to maintain a small portion of a shrinking market would have been a mistake.

@Dave OddieI was A mount shooter as well and bought A7 III last month. I didn't have many old lenses to worry about but I still bought LAEA-4 to convert my Minolta 55mm F1.4 and a few other zoom lenses. I am happy with my decision and most likely will keep my A65 as my backup camera.

This is a Gear/Tech forum, the only color they see is the number of bits at DXO.

Actually taking a photo and seeing that Canons color science and stronger CFA is far better doesnt register here. The crows(people) are only concerned with how much DR a camera has. Not the color quality.

You could have already included the proof that Sony color tonality is better. It isnt though.DPR states it in almost every review. Another site that tests color acuity also proves it. As does the SMI charts.

Yeah, they just need to fire the team who created the menu on a5000 5100 6000 6300 6500 A7 A7II A7R A7RII A7S A7sII because that is not innovation but pure mental insanity from some nerds who's never been on the field shooting! Camera might be in the future, but the menu is still in the middle age at best. And I own 4 of them.

I have owned more than four, but I rarely visit menues when shooting on the field. Then the camera is already well set up, and most settings are available by buttons and wheels. Or I can use the Fn button ...

I don't think much of the control system of the Nikon D5500 either. I used to own a D5000, and I couldn't figure out how to operate a D5500. That's pretty scary. How could it change SO much?!? I am no newbie either. I've owned a Canon G3, two Canon DSLR cameras, a Sony R1, an Olympus point-and-shoot, a Sony A55, a Sony A65, and a Sony A77 before ever trying that Nikon D5500. I never had trouble with operating any of those other cameras as soon as I picked them up, because I owned a number of complicated film cameras (i.e. Canon T90) and other electronics before switching to digital, but the Nikon was a mystery . . . so I didn't buy one.

@fnanni - yes, the menus are a multi-level, disorganized grabastic collection of unintelligible phrases. But once you set up the controls to your liking, you rarely have to access them.

I would like the menus to be as sensible as my Fuji, but be it not so. Even being equal to Nikon would be an improvement - I don't mind Nikon menus. But alas, the cameras are still quite useable once you set them up.

I have a feeling that Sony will have a touch-centric camera operating system soon. Look at their SDK, you will know how comprehensive it is. As a software engineer, I am very optimistic to the future of their menu system. Don't forget Sony also makes smartphone which I believe will help them build a smart-camera as well.

@stevo - I have the OMD EM10ii and the menus are complex and hieroglyphic. Luckily the camera has good controls so you don't have to go into them very often. But I find the Sony menus better than the Oly ones.

Wait after 4 cameras you STILL don't know where things are in the menu? You must not shoot very often. It only took me about a year to really know the ins-and-outs.It's definitely not organized well, but that cause it's packed with features and you have to understand what each of them do.

@StevePhilo - my own experience is that once you get into the menus and set up your controls to your liking, you spend no time in the menus until you want to change something. But with some menus like my Fuji, things are in a sensible and logical place from the start. So there's no "learning" required every time you need to make a change. IE, things are where you expect them to be.

With Sony, things were never where I expected them to be. I never found them logical. If I had spent more time in the menus, I would have learned them just fine. But that might also mean there weren't enough external controls.

@StevoPhilo on the contrary, I make that for a living and I shoot photo and video daily. The thing is that sony's menu is beyond logic. You have video stuff mixed with photo stuff without any logic. Canon is waaaay easier to operate on stressful situation where you have to move from slog2 for video to still shots with many different settings. It's a permanent nightmare if you need a deep personalization. Let's say that timecode settings and HDMI stuff is not in a video section, where you'd expect it, but it's in general settings, just to cite the first thing that comes to mind. If you add that (and that is not a menu issue) your settings MIGHT NOT WORK in some situations (af face tracking with ext recorder for example or in 4k) you easily find yourself during a job cursing the brand for the total lack of REAL PRO usability their menu have. It's distracting and time consuming. That's a fact.

I want camera that does AF during video, autofocus across the frame, lightweight so I can actually take it with me. Nikon cameras do not qualify for that. Not to mention their lenses that have to be backwards compitable to 1996.

Free trips to Vegas where Sony pays for EVERYTHING has a lot to do with it too. Did everyone here think that DPR paid for that studio setup and models? Not to mention dinners, drinks, hotel rooms, entertainment, etc.

As for "innovation". Sony's 5 axis IBIS is about the worst in the business. Other companies pioneered it and Sony tried to copied it. While Minolta pioneered IBIS, Sony first shunned it on mirrorless E mount, while others embraced it. Pixel shift? They were late to the game with that too. What about OSPDAF? Nikon did it first and better. Sony's suffers from "striping" with no fix in sight.Touch screen tech? Sony either doesn't offer it or it has very limited functionality with a painful delay. Fast sensor readout for less rolling shutter? Olympus was first before the A9.60 FPS RAW shooting, Sony can't do it. 10 bit 4:2:2 in camera? Sony won't offer it. I am running out of characters, but Sony either doesn't offer or copied most "innovations".

I can virtually guarantee you Sony will be the FIRST to do 60FPS RAW with a full frame sensor.

I suspect Canon and Nikon haven't released their Mirrorless cameras because they can't keep up with Sony. And Canikon know if they release a lousy FF Mirrorless, all their DSLR fanboys will realize they really are a few years behind the ML technology and those holdouts will jump.

Yes. With a FF sensor. So? As if FF sensors do not have the very downsides which were the reason we saw mirrorless: size and weight. No EVFs no one liked in 2008, not for the live view or video. Size and weight. FF is big in everything and I should know since I shot with FF (D800e). I can't tell you what other should like but D800e is pretty much still among the best FF sensors out there. And to me, the difference in IQ is not that big compared to my E-M1.2.

Steven Ar: We really appreciate your effort and endurance helping misguided photographers to stay away from Sony cameras. What should we do without people like you, all those of us who need an expert like you to find the perfect brand! Awe, awe!

"Free trips to Vegas where Sony pays for EVERYTHING has a lot to do with it too."

Yes, they let review sites get an in-depth hands-on look at their newest products, most of the time before release. More IRL info = more anticipation.

"Sony's 5 axis IBIS is about the worst in the business."

The simple answer is size. M4/3 has equal to or larger bodies, with a ton of room to wiggle their sensors. Not to mention the sensor size is 1/4 of FF, so way less mass to control. Physics. Something nobody seems to understand.

"What about OSPDAF? Nikon did it first and better. Sony's suffers from "striping" with no fix in sight."

Dunno, I had the last Nikon 1 (J5) and AF was pretty terrible compared to my A6300. The only reason I sold it. Striping affects every. single. camera. with OSPDAF, save Canon due to DPAF (which hurts image quality). And even though it's there, it's RARELY ever there. And Sony's cameras are the only ones that can have the images repaired.

"Fast sensor readout for less rolling shutter? Olympus was first before the A9."

Easier to implement on smaller sensors. And Sony had it before the A9, in the RX100 IV.

"60 FPS RAW shooting, Sony can't do it."

Sensor size. Otherwise Nikon would have had it in their DSLRs by now (Nikon 1 shot 60fps RAW).

"Sony's 5 axis IBIS is about the worst in the business"According to what?So you say Minolta pioneered it and Sony copied it? You know they are the same camera company?"What about OSPDAF? Nikon did it first and better."On a tiny sensor, with little DOF. If they are such pioneers, why did they not include it on their latest 3000$+ flagship"Fast sensor readout for less rolling shutter? Olympus was first before the A9."But with completly different tech on a smaller sensor, without the need of a stacked chip, not to mention that the readout on the Olympus is only marginally faster than other cameras, at 1/60th of a second with the A9 going all the way up to 1/160th"60 FPS RAW shooting, Sony can't do it. "Without AF, Auto Exposure and a buffer that lasts for literally a second, this not nearly as usefull as 20FPS with AF

I am not saying other companies don't also innovate. It just seems that Sony is the only one able to bring it all together

Keep in mind, DPR like many older shooters still think you have to shoot FF to be significant. While they do cover the smaller sensors, they don't really respect them as a tool. Sony was the first to bring many of these things to FF, and that sets them apart from N&C. All I know is they are still to big and heavy for the IQ gains IMO.

In The Netherlands doctors were pampered in much the same way (well, worse) by Big Pharma. Of course everyone knew what happened: doctors started to prescribe the medications from the company that provided them some lecture of 30 minutes and the one week stay at the skiresort....You do not bite the hand that feeds you. Sony knows and dpreview knows. Bad: yes, because people want to get information. Objective information. dpreview should have stated clearly that every reviewed is sponsored by whoever invites them.

People are naive. I think a huge majority in the West think their media for instance are objective whereas the papers in other countries (like Russia) are the ones that are biased. It is even so that reviewers and journalist do not have any bad intentions and also think that being aware of a bias means you can adjust it. But it works subconsciously mostly and at times of course it is deliberate. Again: most people in the west are blind for the huge propaganda machine setup by their respective governments. Very naive.

No, that's quite on topic. Very relevant. It appears that Sony "buys" influencers ("reviewers") with fun trips. Vegas, New York, Thailand, ... where else? Why fly people from all around the world for a product intro? Because the influencers are cheap and because it works. Sony gets huge attention and gets rather fluffy, uncritical reviews as a result. All of the influencers publish nearly the same staged photos and repeat the same Sony propaganda. I'm not aware of Nikon and Canon doing this; if they do, let's hear the details.

MikeRan...may be you are just being a bit naive hence fail to see the connection. Ample evidence of western propganda machines (and it is not just our beautiful democratic west, it is worldwide but our media have told us it is mostly in other countries with dictators etc...I will stop ranting now.

"Free trips to Vegas where Sony pays for EVERYTHING has a lot to do with it too. Did everyone here think that DPR paid for that studio setup and models? Not to mention dinners, drinks, hotel rooms, entertainment, etc."

True or speculation?If true, is there ethical obligation to state this at start of reviews?(or even legal obligation in stricter EU?)Then again, if ALL camera companies do same...(similar comp trips are offered to travel media & some publications ban travel writers for life if attending even ONE such trips...)

It is not about the companies it is about reviewers basically not taking the bait. If all reviewers do the same we have biased reporting galore. Anyone who doubts this is living in a fairytale world. Companies know exactly how humans work. Be kind and there is a diminished chance of a critical stance towards you.

Quite clear about “business and advertising”...was in the business (as an advertising photographer) for 25 years. The separation of advertising and ethics in “reporting/reviewing“ without bias... are the questions at hand.

@Magnar W, @BlueBomberTurbo & @MikeRan

Any brand having trying to have influence on reviews, reviewers, reporting on their products, should be questioned.. yet you 3 are defending Sony in their practices.

I didn’t say I didn’t care. But I’m a realist. You can live in your own cbphoto la-la land, but it doesn’t change the reality. If you Don’t understand the reality, well, that’s your problem, not my problem.

And crying like a baby that it’s not fair isn’t going to change the reality. Life isn’t fair. Get over it.

Assuming that the either in-house or external agencies are not totally clueless about getting a return on their investments.... which company do you think spends far more, the most on extravagant trips for reviewers? Do you-do you not think this has any influence on DPR reviews.. or those of other reviewers?

I think reviewers here at DPR are generally reputable. They have been doing this for a long time. And if they clearly get the story wrong, there will be backlash. (And I don’t mean people bitching about generalities. I mean specifics.)

Occasionally I think there are innocent mistakes made. And DPR is pretty forthcoming about those mistakes when they happen (Pentax studio scene reshoot is a good example.)

I think I can generally trust what I read on DPR, however I try to check other sources to get multiple opinions.

As to your first question, I have no idea how much advertising dollars from each of the major camera brands gets spent on trips for reviewers to preview hardware. Are you insinuating one spends substantially more than another? If so, please back it up with real data.

@MikeRan.. I honestly have no idea how much each camera manufacturer spends on advertising. I would not be surprised if the largest, Canon spends the most. It does seem quite obvious though, that Sony spends far more than any other brand on taking reviewers on elaborate "holidays".

Obvious only because you saw a comment on a forum, apparently. And the A7RII had, for years following it the best Hi-res FF sensor out there. Sorry you didn't like it, but it was. The camera was ahead of it's time. Not perfect, and with some substantial weaknesses, but obviously hard to ignore.

I presume you feel the fact that the A7RIII and the A7III and the A9 also all got gold awards that Sony must have paid for those too?

Nikon D850 got Gold too. Did they pay?

Perhaps you're upset that Canon's only FF release this year was the 6DII which (duh) didn't get a Gold award. No amount of money was going to make DPR give that camera a Gold award. Sorry about that.

This whole conspiracy theory is getting ridiculous. Wait, are you one of those people that think NASA faked the moon landing? Or that the earth is flat?

Yup, and the S5 Pro was a D200 with a Fuji sensor. One of the most impressive sensors ever made for DR. Toe to toe with the A7R III and D850 at pixel level, in a 12 year old camera! Too bad they dropped the design. Would be crazy these days with the smaller pixel sizes that are possible.

No doubt Sony has been the leader of engineering amazing sensors for quite a while now. Along their process of learning how to create a "proper" camera to house these sensors, they have made some innovations, but until most recently with the A7RIII/A9 there has been a steep learning curve, as they have tried to play catch-up to all the brands that have decades more experience, both in enthusiast and professional systems. I feel they have attained some very nice enthusiast cameras.. but still need some work on their "pro systems" before they would be able to make more jump ship.

That's a misconception, Sony has been producing professional videocameras for decades and high-end stills cameras like A900 and A99. That doesn't mean every consumer camera should be built like a tank. There's more to photography than sports pro's.

@virtualreality.... by “steep learning curve” I am talking about: awful battery life, poor/non existent weather sealing, awful UI, ergonomics, non intuitive menus, lack of lenses, non existent service, overheating etc etc... With the a7RIII and A9 they have for the most part resolved most of these issues... these were issues across all of their mirrorless attempts.

The problem is, half of things you call "innovation" have already been there. Sony has worked quite hard to match DSLR's performance and they have managed mostly (but not completely).A simple joystick on a Sony body has caused tornados in internet, but that simple "innovation" has been there since Canon 20D!It took several FF bodies and many years to "innovate" a big battery so that a 3000USD body can take more than 300 photos!And now after so many generations Sony cannot even "innovate" a truly weather proof body! Your 3200USD body may leak!There is making news and there is exaggerated bloated "innovations". I see the internet sites and Youtube rope dancers (so called "Youtubers") cannot find balance.

You are mistaken, Sony has been putting joysticks on camera bodies for years. See, for example, the A77, A99, A77II, A99II. Even the A900, going back 10 years... It's true that the first iterations of the A7 family did not feature a joystick, because I guess that it was not deemed a good use of space given the more compact form factor. But that has now been rectified. Likewise the battery. Sony A-mount bodies have for many years used large-capacity batteries and now Sony has worked out how to do that on a more demanding EVF, small body. That is innovation. So your comments really don't hold any water.

Apparently you did not read the articles about Sony because those are not innovations. There are many actual innovations: BSI-sensor, eye-autofocus, silent shooting, no-blackout viewfinder, 20 frames per second drive mode, direct-drive AF. Also many improvements shared with other brands like in-body IS, pixel-shift, 4K video.

DPR studio scene is a photograph, like other photographs. Shows you D850 and 5DSR both make a better image than any Sony. You can easily see it if you bother to look. Features don't trump image quality.

Surely this will get the all the brand warrior conspiracy theorist fanboys to stop accusing you of taking bribes. My sympathies, it must be rough having to read some of the crap around here as a DPR employee. Just keep doing your best and try to ignore it, is my advice. Most of the people reading your articles aren't even looking at the comments down here.

Eye AF is useless if there is any more than two people standing in front of you. These are gimmicks professionals mostly don't use. Same for zebras and focus peaking in the EVF: Inconsistent and at times not accurate; IBIS is a good feature for video but even then the movie makers turn it off when the camera is mounted to a gimbal.

The EVF's in most cameras today are still quite a way off of being crisp enough to provide relief for the human eye. The only one I tried that was any good was on the Panasonic G9. The silent shooting features are at least usable for shooting in theaters or golf courses etc... for mine that is the best feature on The Sony's. The other aspects - build quality, ergonomics, menus and colors are all a step or two behind the big two. The biggest hurdle for Sony in achieving market penetration is their grossly overpriced lenses.

Wrong on Eye AF. You have to use it to know of course. You influence which eye's to track by placing the AF point on that person. Pretty intuitive and easy and works consistently / well. EVF issue is relative and I find the advantages greatly outpace the negatives. YMMV.

You must spend a LOT of time polling professional photographers to know what most of them do, and don’t, use. Can’t leave much time for actual, you know, photography. Please start your own site and show us how to do it right!

Why must a feature be useful to a professional before it is implemented in a camera? Far more amateurs buy cameras than pros, and there are plenty of amateurs that are better photographers than many who make money from photography.

You're dead wrong about focus peaking. It makes shooting manual lenses very easy and I always get sharp in-focus images using it to focus my Twist 60 and CCTV lenses. I can't imagine having to focus a lens like my Twist 60 on my old 80D.

EyeAF is amazing when it works. When shooting portraits of one person it's very helpful. It does have an issue recognizing faces with glasses though.

IBIS is wonderful for those of use who don't use a gimbal and who want stabilization on unstabilized lenses we own.

"The biggest hurdle for Sony in achieving market penetration is their grossly overpriced lenses."The prices are in line with the other big two:Nikons new 70-200 2.8: 2799$Sonys new 70-200 2.8: 2599$

Nikons new 24-70 2.8:2399$Sonys new 24-70 2.8:2199$

Nikon 70-200 F4: 1399$Sony 70-200 F4: 1399$

Nikon 28mm F1.8: 699$Sony 28mm F2: 449$

Nikon 50mm F1.8: 219$Sony 50mm F1.8: 199$

Nikon 85mm F1.8: 499$Sony 85mm F1.8: 549$

Nikon 24-120: 1099$Sony 24-105: 1299$

It is just that Sony E-mount is missing old and third party lenses. Same goes for color. People still say Sony has worse color, but they improved it a lot, and the dozens of blind tests you can find on the internet show that Sony is right up there with Canon and both ahead of Nikon.

Try to use "silent electronic shutter" for shooting in a classical music concert or a golf course. You are silent but you get bend bows and curved golf clubs in your pictures. Not to say that shooting indoors you also get the dark banding as a bonus. Technology serves well if it delivers.

@panther fan - You forgot to mention that most Sony lenses have way more resolving power when used on high MP sensors than both Nikon and Canon. Thus, you are getting a better deal when you purchase both Sony bodies and lenses.

@Joed700 - I completely understand that most are older, but not all. I was merely filling in the missing info based on panther fan's comment that "The prices are in line with the other big two:" The 24-105 from Canon is new and priced $200 below the Sony. We'll have a good idea of price comparison when the two new versions of the 70-200's come out. They may in fact be priced similarly to everyone else. For now though, these older Canon's that compare well with the newer models from the others are priced well below.

And most of them will resolve the higher resolution cameras just fine. If not, what have people been using on their 5DS and 5DSR's since they were released?

Thanks for the addition, but there are some obviously non comparable lenses on that list, like the 85mm F1.8 which is 26 years old, introduced in 1992 for film cameras.Same goes for the 28mm 1.8 which is out of 1995 and strangely still priced higher than the Sony.

We will all see how Canon will price their new lenses, and maybe I will be proven wrong, but i don't think the 70-200 2.8 will be any cheaper than the Nikon version.

... and keep in mind Canon is set to announce the entire 70-200 line refresh... you really think they are gonna keep the pricing that much lower than the competition? What would their motivation be? ;)

@PhotoPhoolish - "And most of them will resolve the higher resolution cameras just fine. If not, what have people been using on their 5DS and 5DSR's since they were released?" There is a simple explanation to this. You got to use what's available to you. And NO, most of these older lenses are unable to resolve the higher MP sensors that Canon has released since 5Dsr plus 5D IV.

The two major players (Nikon and Canon) are lacking behind in terms of producing glasses that can keep up with their sensor technology. Take Nikon for an example, their latest 105mm f/1.4E and even the 70-200mm f/2.8E can barely keep up the their 36MP sensor; they are far from being able to resolve their new 46MP sensor per DXO sharpness results. Canon are doing just a bit better in terms of lens' resolving power but still behind Sigma, Tamron, and Sony. We'll have to wait and see if Canon's newer 70-200mm can improve on their resolving power against their own 5Dsr.

@PhotoPhoolish - continue from above...The only Canon lens that can withstand the challenge is the Canon 300mm f/2.8L II. It can resolve about 45MP out of the 50MP 5Dsr per DXO. Now, that's impressive consider that fact that it was an older design. The rest of the later L lenses can resolve about 30ish MP against the 5Dsr while Sigma and Tamron lenses hit the 38 - 40MP mark.

Even if your argument about the lower prices with Canon lenses is true, the current Canon bodies (5D IV and 6D II) are way overprices when compared to its competitors in term of feature vs value. It's like a trade-off if that's the way you want to look at it. Anyhow, I think the newer 70-200m will price compatibility against Nikon and Sony for sure.

@Joed700 - The problem with DxO is that their numbers are difficult to back up with other data sources. So if I counter with say, Lensrentals, which source is right? That source has shown that Sony lenses are at best equal. And I can provide several other test sites that can back that up. But can any back up DxO data? Part of gathering reliable data is having multiple sources saying the same thing. I find to hard to find any that back up most of what DxO claims.

PhotoPhoolish - I agree that you shouldn't rely your research from one source. However, I did comparison from other websites and my own (having used Nikon, Canon & Sony). Based on DXO sharpness results and lenses I have/had at hand, I can confirm that the results are quite accurate.

@Joed700. Amazing how the weak minded call ‘fanboy’ to all that dare puncture their carefully prepared little universe. By all means continue to believe your nonsense but be aware that we can all read independent sources that test lenses rather than sensors with lenses with results that show Sony overall are no better (or worse) than other top lens makers. Even dxo show pro lenses on a 5DSR are broadly similar (some better some worse) to GM lenses on a 7R2......boom! bye bye.....

If you are so sure about your Canon gear, why bother coming over to this link to check out the Sony's article... For you, the best thing to do is not to read anything and be happy with all your Canon gear. Just a suggestion, based on your current gear, you'll get much better results shooting either the 6D or 5D III, that's what most of your gear are good for, not your 5Dsr. Also, you might get better bang out of your bucks by shooting Sigma Art series lenses. BTW, I used to own most of your current gear, and that's how I know.

Tue 5/15/2018 9:36 am. Sony's hot 'cause they release more & more interesting cameras than the others. What's a matter with the others? Could be the declining market, which causes businesses to seek for profit/sales elsewhere. The low price camera market is pretty-much gone, so it's a luxury thing, and I would opine that for whatever reason, Sony's willing to take monetary risks that Canon for instance isn't.

Low price camera market gone? Really? Tell that to Canon who created their 1000D, 2000D, 4000D and has 50% of the market in their hands! Sony tries to become photo-Apple with very expensive system, where lower segment consists of OLDER cameras and second hand lenses, not CHEAPER models.

I think our high school literature teachers innocently turned us all into conspiracy theorists by instructing us to always question the author and their motives. Thanks for taking the time to acknowledge and respond to your readers.

Personally, l’d like to own a copy of every camera ever made. I don’t feel any brand loyalty. Kudos to any company that brings us exciting gear, motivates photographers, and creates these amazing feats of the engineering. More of your factory tour articles would underscore this. Is a Sony tour on the horizon?

Latest in-depth reviews

The Leica Q2 is an impressively capable fixed-lens, full-frame camera with a 47MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and brings a host of updates to the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116) that was launched in 2015.

The Edelkrone DollyONE is an app-controlled, motorized flat surface camera dolly. The FlexTILT Head 2 is a lightweight head that extends, tilts and pans. They aren't cheap, but when combined these two products provide easy camera mounting, re-positioning and movement either for video work or time lapse photography.

Are you searching for the best image quality in the smallest package? Well, the GR III has a modern 24MP APS-C sensor paired with an incredibly sharp lens and fits into a shirt pocket. But it's not without its caveats, so read our full review to get the low-down on Ricoh's powerful new compact.

The Olympus OM-D E-M1X is the ultimate sports, action and wildlife camera for professional Micro Four Thirds users. However, it can't quite match the level of AF reliability offered by its full frame competitors.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera for less than $1000? The best cameras for under $1000 should have good ergonomics and controls, great image quality and be capture high-quality video. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing under $1000 and recommended the best.

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

We've updated our waterproof camera buying guide with the latest round of rugged compacts, and we've crowned a new winner as the best pick in the category: the Olympus TG-6. That is, unless you happen to find a good deal on the TG-5.

Researchers with the Samsung AI Center in Moscow and the Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology have created a system that transforms still images into talking portraits with as little as a single image.

K&R Photographics, a camera store in Crescent Springs, Kentucky, was robbed by armed men, who not only took thousands of dollars worth of camera equipment, but also injured the 70-year-old co-owner of the store.

The new Fujifilm GFX 100 boasts some impressive specifications, including 100MP, in-body stabilization and 4K video. But what's it like to shoot with? Senior Editor Barnaby Britton found out on a recent trip to Florence, Italy.

It's here! The long-awaited next-generation Fujifilm GFX has been officially launched. Click through to learn more about the camera that Fujifilm is hoping will shake up the pro photography market - the GFX100.

We've known about the Fujifilm GFX 100 since last fall, but now it's official: this 102MP medium-format monster will be available at the end of June for $10,000. In addition to its incredible resolution, the camera also has in-body IS, a hybrid AF system, 4K video and a removable EVF.

According to DJI, any drone model weighing over 250 grams will have AirSense Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) receivers installed to help drone operators know when planes and helicopters are nearby.

Chris and Jordan are kicking off a new segment in which they make feature suggestions to manufacturers for the benefit of all photographer-kind. To start things off, they take a look at the humble USB-C port and everything it could be doing for us.

The Olympus TG-5 is one of our favorite waterproof cameras, and the company today introduced the TG-6, a relatively low-key update. New features include the addition of an anti-reflective coating on the sensor, a higher-res LCD, and more underwater and macro modes.

The Leica Q2 is an impressively capable fixed-lens, full-frame camera with a 47MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and brings a host of updates to the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116) that was launched in 2015.

We've been playing around with a prototype of the new Peak Design Travel Tripod and are impressed so far: it's incredibly compact, fast to deploy and stable enough for the heaviest bodies. However, the price may turn some away.